Some of the voices on this board who complain the game is too easy are also some of the voices who complain about "setting" and "theme". Well has it occured to the people who fall in to both the aforementioned categories that the reason they're not getting the most out of the theme and setting is because they are ignoring it in favour of doing everything they can to win, instead? Maybe if they slowed down their hunt for another Elder Sign and instead took the time to have an encounter at, say, Velma's Diner, they'd actually get more out of the game in terms of theme and setting AND it would be harder because they are spending a turn not hunting for the next gate seal but doing something else instead ...

And then they'd stop trying to make the game harder for the rest of us and allow us to enjoy it as it is.

>quickly swallows drink and leaves saloon<

Well, i dont think the game is too easy, and I don't think it is lacking in theme either... but to speak for those who may say so:

You're merely suggesting that the players decrease the effectiveness of their characters. That doesnt make the game *harder*, exactly. Take a video game for example... Say, one of the Final Fantay's, if you've played them. This is a game that doesn't come with a 'hard mode'. If you're finding it too easy, you might say, "well, I'm not going to get some of the ultimate weapons, I'll level as little as possible, and I won't use the strongest characters". You didn't make the *game* harder, you just imposed an artificial handicap on yourself. Understand the difference?

Nevertheless, I think that those handicaps *are* the way that players seeking more of a challenge ought to go. There are plenty of people who think the game is more than difficult enough.. That doesn't mean I happen to be thrilled about your suggestion specifically. Taking Velma's encounters is really just kind of lame. It doesn't add to the fun of the game, it doesnt really add to the theme of the game (hey, there's a diner).

Avi_dreader is doing a pretty good job with some custom heralds that look pretty vicious. I'm not too much for custom components, but I think that the masochists out there should take a look, they do look fun. Maybe I'll try some of them out after all... but not until I feel I have suficiently beaten up on Dagon and Hydra (and if you think those two are easy.... then I take my hat off to you).

i agree, i dont think the game is easy, and i think its a great game and setting, if you want it harder for you im sure you can make your own settings, and house rules, i think trying to acomplish tasks in such a set way i.e the constant "chasing " gates down may not help, its the reason i dont play competitvly, as for me its not about enjoying the game, with say a deck of cards that is made of 60 not 50, and 1s and 2s not 3 of everything.

its about enjoying not winning, maybe just step back, and as said just amble around for a while? hey its up to you how you play but im sure the majority of players enjoy this game a lot

Stenun said:

What's "too easy"? That stat's show players win a bit over 60% of the time. That's a lot better than I do when I play Settlers of Catan with my son and grandson. A lot better.

It's a fine line of discrimination to determine what is too easy. In the long run, the stories give a 0% victory, though in the short run the percentage is higher, maybe even better than 60% for the world, though individuals die horribly all the time. Personally I think 50-60% chance of winning for good play is about right. Certain combinations of expansions and GOOS are in fact easier than that. For them the game is too easy. Some are so hard and/or difficult as to be boring.

For those of us who know some of the stories and know some of the names of the Ancient Ones through those stories, the basic game Ancient Ones compared to the later Ancient Ones are not in line.

Incidentally I recently tried a game where the Clues were originally placed on the stable locations to begin the game. All the clues were picked up except Velma's and the Police Station. Have you tasted Velma's Chili? That's why even a clue wasn't enough to entice any investigator to eat there. And of course you're more likely to be shot in the Arkham police station than any place else in Essex county.

Another tidbit. I have a GPS and I put in "Velma" under diners and there wasn't any. Then, last week, on my annual home visit to Terre Haute, Indiana, I passed a newly opened "Velma's Cafe". I didn't go in there either. But I did stop to look inside. Her blue plate special was calamari (just kidding).

I've been in Velma's (in Arkham) a bunch. I even worked as her bouncer for a while. I was there when she went insane when the blight got her. It was Terror-ible.

Stenun said:

::Raised eyebrow:: I don't know about you, but part of the fun of this game for me is as a strategy game. It's one thing to give yourself a constant definite handicap like, lets say, a team of Amanda, Vincent, and Jim (which by the way, I wouldn't have any problem playing— I think it'd be alot of fun), or a herald (I wouldn't pick Dagon and Hydra unless I had a crack team, because I think they're often overpowering without making the game particularly interesting— I don't like having to do game set up and then clean up so soon after— besides, they tempt me to gear up, perhaps I should just add in a fourth player while playing against them... That'd probably be fine, I think handling them with three randoms is a little too difficult for me, though as I said before, if it were difficult and thematic I wouldn't mind, instead it feels more like the difficulty of trying to pass through a wall by running into it with your face. Doable (especially if the wall is made of weak building materials), but usually painful.

I don't like the idea of free roaming investigators, but remember, I don't come to Arkham for an RPGish experience, I go for a highly thematic strategy appearance. I think we actually have two types of gamer that AH appeals to (RPGers and Strategy Gamers), hence these sorts of discussions. Yes, I know this is a false dichotomy (I like RPGs and Strategy Games, but while an RPG will keep me hooked for 30-50 hours, before I swore off RTS and other open ended infinite time-suckers, other than Azathoth, I would play one of those for eight hours a day for a year or two).

::Shrug:: as I've said before, if you're having problems with game difficulty (and you don't care enough about strategy to try and overcome them), you really ought to buy Kingsport for the Heralds, or print out custom heralds or custom investigators (that tilt the game in your favor), or play investigators that (to someone who shares my perspective) are overpowered, or select your AO from the base game (without my heralds).

I really don't think most players of Arkham Horror find the difficulty overwhelming (at least not on these forums). Many people just don't buy the next expansion until they feel they have the current one mastered. And besides... Even if a team has a 40% win rate (and I'm not saying I wouldn't consider that sad), you still have 1-8 players winning 40% of the time. How many games can you say spread victory around so easily? Why don't you want a challenge to strive for? RPG style gamer?

mageith said:

I believe I'd rephrase this as "For those of us who know some of the stories and know some of the names of the Ancient Ones through those stories, the basic game Ancient Ones compared to the later Ancient Ones are BUUUUUUULLSHIIIIIIT!"

Which leads to name cards that say this, "Hello. I am an Ancient One. I am easily defeated. After the humans defeated me, they made me work at Walmart. Boy my tentacles are sore from restocking shelves. Back in the day they were sore from other things ::mumble grumble::"